Part III Action Research & Resource Centre, an organization based in New Delhi, India, that works with intersectional themes of law, human rights, and social justice, published a report on the right to protest. Authored by Sanjana Srikumar, the Centre’s Lead in Litigation and Research and former contributor to CGFoE, and Tisha Roy, Student at NALSAR University of Law, the report interrogates the role of India’s Supreme Court and High Courts in defining the right to protest.

About the Report

Peaceful protests have played a critical role in the freedom struggle, in the face of brutal repression of dissent by the colonial government. In recent years, protests that seek to uphold constitutional values have been the source of public debate – not just because of the issues that prompt the protest but also on the forms of restrictions on this right that are justifiable in a democratic, sovereign India. For instance, recent reports that suggest that passports of protesting farmers will be cancelled on the basis of images in surveillance footage prompt concerns about the need to ensure that restrictions on the right to protest are compatible with fundamental rights guaranteed in the Constitution.

This report seeks to critically examine the role of the Supreme Court and High Courts in defining the contours of the right to protest. Protests often occupy both public spaces and public imagination. It is this dual role that is protected by the Constitution under the right of speech and expression, which affirms the right of citizens to express dissent and have their views heard, and the right to peaceful assembly, which affirms their right to express this dissent collectively and through gatherings at physical spaces. The report, therefore, considers how constitutional courts have viewed protests and critically examines their application of a fundamental rights framework to uphold these rights or adjudicate the validity of restrictions.